IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/syseng/v18y2015i4p323-338.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Group Decision Procedure to Model the Dependency Structure of Complex Systems: Framework and Case Study for Critical Infrastructures

Author

Listed:
  • Jukrin Moon
  • Dongoo Lee
  • Taesik Lee
  • Jaemyung Ahn
  • Jindong Shin
  • Kyungho Yoon
  • Dongsik Choi

Abstract

This paper proposes a group decision framework to model the dependency structure of a complex system based on expert surveys. The proposed framework is designed to systematically populate a dependency matrix whose entry indicates the degree that its row element is influenced by its column element. The degree of dependency is assessed based on two different perspectives—of the influencing element and of the influenced element—and the assessments with the two perspectives are separately compiled and compared in the initial round survey. Entries with large assessment gaps are classified as discussion items and a group decision procedure to reduce the gaps in these items is applied in the consensus round survey. A case study for dependency modeling of critical infrastructures of South Korea was conducted using the proposed framework and its effectiveness was demonstrated. The analysis on the results of the case study discovered an insight that the opinions from the influenced elements are more convincing and respected in the consensus round than those from the influencing elements.

Suggested Citation

  • Jukrin Moon & Dongoo Lee & Taesik Lee & Jaemyung Ahn & Jindong Shin & Kyungho Yoon & Dongsik Choi, 2015. "Group Decision Procedure to Model the Dependency Structure of Complex Systems: Framework and Case Study for Critical Infrastructures," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(4), pages 323-338, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:syseng:v:18:y:2015:i:4:p:323-338
    DOI: 10.1002/sys.21306
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/sys.21306
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/sys.21306?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Graefe, Andreas & Armstrong, J. Scott, 2011. "Comparing face-to-face meetings, nominal groups, Delphi and prediction markets on an estimation task," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 183-195, January.
    2. Tyson R. Browning, 1998. "Integrative mechanisms for multiteam integration: Findings from five case studies," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 1(2), pages 95-112.
    3. Rajiv D. Banker & Sandra A. Slaughter, 2000. "The Moderating Effects of Structure on Volatility and Complexity in Software Enhancement," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 11(3), pages 219-240, September.
    4. Jaemyung Ahn & Olivier L. de Weck & Martin Steele, 2014. "Credibility Assessment of Models and Simulations Based on NASA’s Models and Simulation Standard Using the Delphi Method," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 17(2), pages 237-248, June.
    5. Pimmler, Thomas U. (Thomas Udo) & Eppinger, Steven D., 1994. "Integration analysis of product decompositions," Working papers 3690-94., Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
    6. Eppinger, Steven D. & Browning, Tyson R., 2012. "Design Structure Matrix Methods and Applications," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262017520, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Alan MacCormack & John Rusnak & Carliss Y. Baldwin, 2006. "Exploring the Structure of Complex Software Designs: An Empirical Study of Open Source and Proprietary Code," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(7), pages 1015-1030, July.
    2. Tyson R. Browning, 1999. "Designing system development projects for organizational integration," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 2(4), pages 217-225.
    3. Babak Heydari & Mohsen Mosleh & Kia Dalili, 2016. "From Modular to Distributed Open Architectures: A Unified Decision Framework," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(3), pages 252-266, May.
    4. Habib, Tufail & Kristiansen, Jimmi Normann & Rana, Mohammad Bakhtiar & Ritala, Paavo, 2020. "Revisiting the role of modular innovation in technological radicalness and architectural change of products: The case of Tesla X and Roomba," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 98(C).
    5. Jaemyung Ahn & Minkyu Choi & Eun Suk Suh, 2018. "Entropy‐based system assessment metric for determining architecture's robustness to different stakeholder perspectives," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 21(5), pages 476-489, September.
    6. Prommer, Lisa & Tiberius, Victor & Kraus, Sascha, 2020. "Exploring the future of startup leadership development," Journal of Business Venturing Insights, Elsevier, vol. 14(C).
    7. Uwe Beyer & Oliver Ullrich, 2022. "Organizational Complexity as a Contributing Factor to Underperformance," Businesses, MDPI, vol. 2(1), pages 1-15, March.
    8. Manuel E. Sosa & Steven D. Eppinger & Craig M. Rowles, 2004. "The Misalignment of Product Architecture and Organizational Structure in Complex Product Development," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(12), pages 1674-1689, December.
    9. Armstrong, J. Scott & Green, Kesten C. & Graefe, Andreas, 2015. "Golden rule of forecasting: Be conservative," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(8), pages 1717-1731.
    10. Morgan Dwyer & Bruce Cameron & Zoe Szajnfarber, 2015. "A Framework for Studying Cost Growth on Complex Acquisition Programs," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(6), pages 568-583, November.
    11. Félicia Saïah & Diego Vega & Harwin de Vries & Joakim Kembro, 2023. "Process modularity, supply chain responsiveness, and moderators: The Médecins Sans Frontières response to the Covid‐19 pandemic," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 32(5), pages 1490-1511, May.
    12. Litsiou, Konstantia & Polychronakis, Yiannis & Karami, Azhdar & Nikolopoulos, Konstantinos, 2022. "Relative performance of judgmental methods for forecasting the success of megaprojects," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 1185-1196.
    13. Junguang Zhang & Xiwei Song & Hongyu Chen & Ruixia (Sandy) Shi, 2016. "Determination of critical chain project buffer based on information flow interactions," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 67(9), pages 1146-1157, September.
    14. Keller, Jonas & von der Gracht, Heiko A., 2014. "The influence of information and communication technology (ICT) on future foresight processes — Results from a Delphi survey," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 81-92.
    15. Fixson, Sebastian K. & Park, Jin-Kyu, 2008. "The power of integrality: Linkages between product architecture, innovation, and industry structure," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 1296-1316, September.
    16. Liu, Zhixue & Ding, Ronggui & Wang, Lei & Song, Rui & Song, Xinyi, 2023. "Cooperation in an uncertain environment: The impact of stakeholders' concerted action on collaborative innovation projects risk management," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    17. Robert Schmidt & Kasper Sanchez Vibaek & Simon Austin, 2014. "Evaluating the adaptability of an industrialized building using dependency structure matrices," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(1-2), pages 160-182, February.
    18. Pavel Atanasov & Phillip Rescober & Eric Stone & Samuel A. Swift & Emile Servan-Schreiber & Philip Tetlock & Lyle Ungar & Barbara Mellers, 2017. "Distilling the Wisdom of Crowds: Prediction Markets vs. Prediction Polls," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(3), pages 691-706, March.
    19. Christoph Markmann & Alexander Spickermann & Heiko A. von der Gracht & Alexander Brem, 2021. "Improving the question formulation in Delphi‐like surveys: Analysis of the effects of abstract language and amount of information on response behavior," Futures & Foresight Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 3(1), March.
    20. MacCormack, Alan & Baldwin, Carliss & Rusnak, John, 2012. "Exploring the duality between product and organizational architectures: A test of the “mirroring” hypothesis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(8), pages 1309-1324.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:syseng:v:18:y:2015:i:4:p:323-338. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1002/(ISSN)1520-6858 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.